According to reports published in the Physical Review Letter, the National Institute of Standards Technology (NIST) published a paper indicating that it had discovered a new type of atomic clock based on mercury-ion. The report said that the new atomic clock is so accurate it's nearly 6 times more precise than the current cesium-based atomic clock.

The report said that the NIST currently operates a cesium-based atomic clock called the NIST-F1, which is accurate for roughly 70 million years. If operated continuously, the NIST-F1 would only be off by 1 second after 70 million years. The new mercury-ion atomic clock on the other hand will take 400 million years.

The new experimental clock measures the atomic resonance frequency of a mercury atom. The atom itself is electrically charged and kept in an extremely cold suspension. Using the new mercury-ion atomic clock, scientists at the NIST say that they will be able to conduct more precise experiments and further develop applications that rely on atomic-time accuracy such as GPS systems. Currently, the international standard that defines what one second is relies on cesium-based atomic clocks -- 9,192,631,770 radiation cycles of the change between two energy levels of a cesium atom. The NIST says that it will be five to ten years before we see mercury-ion clocks replace cesium ones.

Comments

Threshold

Username

Password

remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Yeah, lots of people think the end of the world is just around the corner. They're called religious zealots.

The difference at this point in time is that there are actually threats that could end the world. Nuclear weapons being an obvious one. Unless of course you want to dispute the effects of hundreds or even just dozens of modern nuclear weapons blowing up in the atmosphere.

Also, scientists seem to think that the threats of global warming are very real. I would consider the proclamations of a scientist over those of an 18th century bible-thumping nitwit wouldn't you?

I think that as technology improves the technological baseline draws closer and closer to the maximum. (In first world countries) Technology empowers people to create more technology. As to what this means for war and acts of violence in the world today, use your imagination...

> "Unless of course you want to dispute the effects of hundreds or even just dozens of modern nuclear weapons blowing up in the atmosphere."

I'll be happy to dispute it. The detonation of a few dozen, or even a few hundred nuclear weapons in the atmosphere will not mean the end of the world. A few thousand ground bursts now might mean a nuclear winter...or it might not. The data is open to interpretation.

> "Also, scientists seem to think that the threats of global warming are very real"

You won't find any serious climatologist who claims global warming entails the "end of the world".

"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken